Cherupally Vanaja vs Yada Satyanarayana
2025 Latest Caselaw 5028 Tel

Telangana High Court

Cherupally Vanaja vs Yada Satyanarayana on 23 April, 2025

Author: T.Vinod Kumar

Bench: T.Vinod Kumar, P.Sree Sudha

     THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR
                       AND
      THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA

          CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.111 of 2025


JUDGMENT:

(Per Hon'ble Sri Justice T.Vinod Kumar)

Heard learned counsel for the appellant and Sri K.Venkata

Reddy, learned counsel for the respondent, and perused the

record.

2. The appellant herein is defendant in the suit filed by the

respondent herein as plaintiff vide O.S.No.5 of 2024 on the file

of V Additional District Judge, Miryalaguda, Nalgonda District.

3. The respondent herein had filed an Interlocutory

Application in the aforesaid suit under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2

CPC r/w Section 151 CPC for grant of relief of temporary

injunction restraining the petitioner herein from alienating the

suit schedule property pending disposal of the suit.

4. The case of the respondent as set out in the suit is that the

appellant herein had entered into an agreement of sale dated

10-12-2023 to sell her property for the consideration mentioned

therein, pursuant to which the respondent herein made payment

of first installment of Rs.15,00,000/- on 29-12-2023.

5. The case of the respondent before the trial Court is that

though, he was ready to make the second installment/balance

sale consideration of Rs.65,00,000/- as due performance in terms

of the agreement, the appellant did not turn up to show the

original title deed of the suit schedule property, upon which, the

respondent herein got a legal notice dated 13-02-2024 issued

calling upon the appellant herein to come forward to receive the

balance sale consideration and also execute registered sale deed.

6. It is the further case of the respondent herein before the trial

Court that since, the appellant did not come forward to execute

the sale deed in terms of agreement of sale and is seeking to

alienate the property, he had filed the underlying Interlocutory

Application restraining the respondent from alienating the suit

schedule property pending disposal of the suit.

7. On behalf of the appellant/defendant, it is contended that

the agreement of sale entered into itself provides that in the event

of the respondent/plaintiff failing to make the payment on the

due dates, the agreement of sale stands annulled, and thus, the

trial Court without appreciating the aforesaid fact, granted

injunction in favour of the respondent.

8. We have taken note of the respective contentions urged.

9. Admittedly, the suit is filed by the respondent herein

seeking specific performance of agreement of sale dated

10-12-2023.

10. The trial Court, by taking into consideration the documents

marked on behalf of respondent herein as petitioner/plaintiff,

found case in favour of the respondent/petitioner and granted an

order of temporary injunction restraining the respondent from

alienating the suit schedule property pending disposal of the suit.

The said order of the trial Court, in the considered view of this

Court, cannot be said either suffering from error or perversity

since, if the appellant is allowed to deal with the property

pending adjudication of the suit, the suit filed by the plaintiff for

specific performance of agreement of sale would stand defeated.

11. For the said reason, this Court is of the view that the order

of the trial Court does not call for any interference and it is

sustained.

12. Accordingly, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed.

No costs.

13. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending if any shall

stand closed.

____________________ T. VINOD KUMAR, J

_________________ P.SREE SUDHA, J Date: 23-04-2025 Vsv